90% Take home?

[Ketchup]

I said "up to 90%".

[kal]

I said "up to 90%".

I'm around the 80-85% mark running a standard Ltd with 15k a year expenses, share split with the missus etc, why in the world people would want to risk getting into bed with these dodgy outfits these days is beyond me...

[Ketchup]

I'm around the 80-85% mark running a standard Ltd with 15k a year expenses, share split with the missus etc, why in the world people would want to risk getting into bed with these dodgy outfits these days is beyond me...

I just take out what i can to keep me below higher threshold and leave remaining capital in company with a few to shutting it down in a few years.

[kal]

I just take out what i can to keep me below higher threshold and leave remaining capital in company with a few to shutting it down in a few years.

Same here except the missus doesn't work right now so can take out more while ensuring that neither of us fall into the higher rate tax bracket.

[northernladuk]

I'm around the 80-85% mark running a standard Ltd with 15k a year expenses, share split with the missus etc, why in the world people would want to risk getting into bed with these dodgy outfits these days is beyond me...

You could argue splitting income with your missus isn't exactly straight down the line. Yes there is nothing stopping you doing it but can't argue it is anything but avoidance in 99% of situations including contractors. If I said ( a couple of years ago) one of them is a legal method to avoid tax and retain 85% of earnings but does not conform to the spirit of the law which one would you say I was talking about?

... but let us not get in to that argument on this thread.

[Ketchup]

You could argue splitting income with your missus isn't exactly straight down the line. Yes there is nothing stopping you doing it but can't argue it is anything but avoidance in 99% of situations including contractors. If I said ( a couple of years ago) one of them is a legal method to avoid tax and retain 85% of earnings but does not conform to the spirit of the law which one would you say I was talking about?

... but let us not get in to that argument on this thread.

I agree with this, before HMRC closed in on the loan schemes, i am sure they were seen in the same light as income splitting (I wasn't contracting then so wouldn't know), and I suspect that over the next few years they will start closing down other loopholes. Contracting through a LTD is enough for me, I often calculate the salary I would have to earn in a permie role to get a similar level of take home and lifestyle and am not too unhappy with earning the equivalent of a salary far greater than 100k at 28.

[eek]

You could argue splitting income with your missus isn't exactly straight down the line. Yes there is nothing stopping you doing it but can't argue it is anything but avoidance in 99% of situations including contractors. If I said ( a couple of years ago) one of them is a legal method to avoid tax and retain 85% of earnings but does not conform to the spirit of the law which one would you say I was talking about?

... but let us not get in to that argument on this thread.

I know that but if you wife is not working and remains willing to deal with the risks of the contractor lifestyle then they deserve the dividends from the risk.

[kal]

You could argue splitting income with your missus isn't exactly straight down the line. Yes there is nothing stopping you doing it but can't argue it is anything but avoidance in 99% of situations including contractors. If I said ( a couple of years ago) one of them is a legal method to avoid tax and retain 85% of earnings but does not conform to the spirit of the law which one would you say I was talking about?

... but let us not get in to that argument on this thread.

It may be conform to the spirit of the law but it is legal, I can't argue with your assertions but who among us would voluntarily pay more tax than we have to (and I include the likes of Amazon and Google in this), at the end of the day if what any of us are doing to minimise our tax exposure is wrong its up to the government to legislate and make it illegal not bleat on in the press about how they are going to crack down on all of these companies which are (legally) paying little or no tax while actually doing very little about it...

[eek]

It may be conform to the spirit of the law but it is legal, I can't argue with your assertions but who among us would voluntarily pay more tax than we have to (and I include the likes of Amazon and Google in this), at the end of the day if what any of us are doing to minimise our tax exposure is wrong its up to the government to legislate and make it illegal not bleat on in the press about how they are going to crack down on all of these companies which are (legally) paying little or no tax while actually doing very little about it...

ATW

[kal]

I know that but if you wife is not working and remains willing to deal with the risks of the contractor lifestyle then they deserve the dividends from the risk.

Yes I agree, when I was a permie just over a year ago I used to drop my son off to nursery at 9 and then drive the 30 mins to work, was back in the evening to put him to bed. Now that I am contracting, for my current role i leave at 6 am and get back home for 7ish/8ish (and stay overnight once or twice a week) = the missus needs to do a lot more and I couldn't have taken this role if she didn't.